Appendix 10.

AN EXAMPLE OF AIRPLANE
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
PROCEDURE - JET TRANSPORT

E.G.Tulapurkara
A.Venkattraman
V.Ganesh

REPORT NO: AE TR 2007-4

APRIL 2007

An Example of Airplane Preliminary Design

Procedure - Jet Transport
E.G.Tulapurkara
A.Venkattraman
V.Ganesh

Abstract
In this report, we present an application of the preliminary design
procedure followed in aircraft design course. A 150 seater jet airplane
cruising at M = 0.8, at 11 km altitude and having a gross still air
range(GSAR) of 4000 km is considered. The presentation is divided
into eight sections
Data collection
Preliminary Weight estimation
Optimization of wing loading and thrust loading
Wing design
Fuselage design, preliminary design of tail surface and preliminary layout
c.g. calculation
Control surface design
Features of designed airplane
Details of performance estimation

AICTE Emeritus Fellow, Department of Aerospace Engineering, IIT Madras

B.Tech Student, Department of Aerospace Engineering, IIT Madras

Dual Degree Student, Department of Aerospace Engineering, IIT Madras

Contents
1 Data Collection
1.1 The Design Philosophy . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.1 Type of Aircraft and Market . . .
1.1.2 Budget and Time Constraints . .
1.1.3 Other Constraints and Standards
1.2 Preliminary Design . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.1 Preliminary Weight Estimate . .
1.2.2 Wing parameters . . . . . . . . .
1.2.3 Empennage . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.4 Control Surfaces . . . . . . . . .
1.2.5 Fuselage . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.6 Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2.7 Landing Gear . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Overall height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

6
6
6
7
7
8
9
9
10
11
12
12
12
12

2 Revised Weight Estimation

2.1 Fuel fraction estimation . . .
2.1.1 Warm up and Take off
2.1.2 Climb . . . . . . . . .
2.1.3 Cruise . . . . . . . . .
2.1.4 Loiter . . . . . . . . .
2.1.5 Landing . . . . . . . .
2.2 Empty Weight Fraction . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

21
21
21
21
22
23
23
23

3 Wing Loading and Thrust Loading

3.1 Landing Distance Consideration . . . . . .
3.2 Maximum Speed(Vmax ) Consideration . . .
3.2.1 Estimation of K . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 (R/C)max consideration . . . . . . . . . .
3.4 Based on Minimum Fuel for Range (Wfmin )
3.5 Based on Absolute Ceiling . . . . . . . . .
3.6 Summary of Constraints . . . . . . . . . .
3.7 Consideration of Wing Weight (Ww ) . . .
3.8 Choosing a W/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.9 Thrust Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.9.1 Requirement for Vmax . . . . . . . .
3.10 Requirements for (R/C)max . . . . . . . .
3.11 Take-Off Thrust Requirements . . . . . . .
3.12 Engine Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

25
25
27
27
32
33
34
36
36
37
37
38
38
38
39

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

3.13 Engine Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

4 Wing Design
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 Airfoil Selection . . . . . . . .
4.2.1 Design Lift Coefficient
4.2.2 Airfoil Thickness Ratio
4.3 Other Parameters . . . . . . .
4.3.1 Aspect Ratio . . . . .
4.3.2 Taper Ratio . . . . . .
4.3.3 Root and Tip Chords .
4.3.4 Dihedral . . . . . . . .
4.3.5 Wing Twist . . . . . .
4.4 Cranked Wing Design . . . .
4.5 Wing Incidence(iw ) . . . . . .
4.6 Vertical Location of Wing . .
4.7 Areas of Flaps and Ailerons .

. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
and Wing Sweep
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .

5 Fuselage and Tail Layout

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2 Initial Estimate of Fuselage Length
5.3 Nose and Cockpit - Front Fuselage
5.4 Passenger Cabin Layout . . . . . .
5.4.1 Cabin Cross Section . . . .
5.4.2 Cabin length . . . . . . . .
5.4.3 Cabin Diameter . . . . . . .
5.5 Rear Fuselage . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.6 Total Fuselage Length . . . . . . .
5.7 Tail surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.8 Engine Location . . . . . . . . . . .
5.9 Landing Gear Arrangement . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

6 Estimation of Component Weights and

6.1 Aircraft mass statement . . . . . . . .
6.1.1 Structures Group . . . . . . . .
6.1.2 Propulsion Group . . . . . . . .
6.1.3 Fixed equipment group . . . . .
6.2 Weights of Various Components . . . .
6.3 C.G Location and C.G Travel . . . . .
6.3.1 Wing Location on Fuselage . . .
6.4 C.G Travel for Critical Cases . . . . .
3

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

C.G
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Location
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

42
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
45
45
46
47
47
48

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

48
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
51
52
54
54

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

55
55
55
56
56
57
57
57
58

6.5

6.4.1 Full Payload and No Fuel .

6.4.2 No Payload and No Fuel . .
6.4.3 No Payload and Full fuel . .
6.4.4 Payload distribution for 15%
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. .
. .
. .
c.g
. .

. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
travel
. . . .

7 Control Surfaces
7.1 Stability and Controllability . . . . . . . .
7.2 Static Longitudinal Stability and Control .
7.2.1 Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2.2 Aft Center of gravity limit . . . . .
7.2.3 Forward center of Gravity Limit . .
7.2.4 Determination of initial parameters
7.3 Lateral Stability and Control . . . . . . .
7.3.1 Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.3.2 Equations for directional stability .
7.3.3 Determination of initial parameters
8 Features of the Designed Airplane
8.1 Three View Drawing . . . . . . .
8.2 Overall Dimensions . . . . . . . .
8.3 Engine details . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4 Weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.5 Wing Geometry . . . . . . . . . .
8.6 Fuselage Geometry . . . . . . . .
8.7 Nacelle Geometry . . . . . . . . .
8.8 Horizontal Tail Geometry . . . .
8.9 Vertical Tail Geometry . . . . . .
8.10 Other details . . . . . . . . . . .
8.11 Crew and Payload . . . . . . . .
8.12 Performance . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

9 Performance Estimation
9.1 Estimation of Drag Polar . . . . . . . . .
9.1.1 Estimation of (CDo )W B . . . . . .
9.1.2 Estimation of (CDo )V and (CDo )H
9.1.3 Estimation of Misc Drag - Nacelle
9.1.4 CDo of the airplane . . . . . . . .
9.1.5 Induced Drag . . . . . . . . . . .
9.1.6 Final Drag Polar . . . . . . . . .
9.2 Engine Characteristics . . . . . . . . . .
4

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

. . .
. . .
. .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

58
58
59
59
59

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

60
60
60
60
60
61
61
65
65
65
65

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

67
67
67
67
67
69
69
69
69
70
70
70
70

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

72
72
72
74
75
75
75
76
77

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

9.3

9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
9.8
9.9

Level Flight Performance . .

9.3.1 Stalling speed . . . .
9.3.2 Variation of Vmin and
Steady Climb . . . . . . . .
Range and Endurance . . .
Turning Performance . . . .
Take-off distance . . . . . .
Landing distance . . . . . .
Concluding remarks . . . . .

. . .
. . .
Vmax
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .

10 Acknowledgements

. . .
. . .
with
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .

. . . . .
. . . . .
Altitude
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

80
80
82
90
96
99
103
104
105
107

Data Collection

1.1

The Design Philosophy

The conceptual design forms the initial stage of the design process. In spite
of the fact that there are numerous aircrafts, each having its own special features, one can find common features underlying most of them. For example,
the following aspects would dominate the conceptual design of a commercial
transport jet.
1.1.1

Type of Aircraft and Market

The Civil Transport Jets could be classified in the following way :

Class No.of Seats Typical GSAR(km)

Propulsion
B-747
>400
>13000
High Bypass
type
Turbofan
B-757
200-400
10000
High Bypass
type
Turbofan
B-737
100-200
5000 Medium Bypass
type
Turbofan
Regionals
30-100
2000
Turboprop
Table 1: Classification of Civil Jet Airplane
From the values of gross still air range in table, it is clear that intercontinental flights would be restricted to the first two classes while the last
two would handle bulk of the traffic in regional routes. The different classes
cater to different sections of the market. One decides the range and payload(ie passengers) after identifying the target market. In this example, we
plan to cater to the traffic in regional routes. We will design a Transport
Jet with a Gross Still Air Range(GSAR) of 4000km (=Rg ) and a single-class
seating capacity of 150. We could roughly classify our aircraft as belonging
the B-737 class. We collect data for similar aircrafts and use this data set as
the basis for making initial estimates.
Our aim is to design an aircraft that satisfies the following requirements.
Gross Still Air Range = 4,000 km
No. of passengers = 150
6

 Flight Cruise Mach No. = 0.80

Altitude =11,000 m
1.1.2

Budget and Time Constraints

Any design team would be required to work with a limited amount of funds
and time. These could dictate various aspects of the design process.For example, innovations which could end up in a spiralling budget may be shelved.
Also, in case of highly competitive markets, the ability to get the aircraft
ready in the prescribed time frame is very crucial. The design team must
ensure that cost and time over-runs are minimized to the extent possible.
1.1.3

Other Constraints and Standards

Some of the major demands on the design arise from the various mandatory
and operational regulations. All commercial aircrafts must satisfy the Airworthiness requirements of various countries. Typically, each country has its
own Aviation Authority (e.g, DGCA in India, CAA in UK, FAA in USA).
Airworthiness requirements would cover the following aspects of the aircraft
1. Flight
This includes performance items like stall, take-off, climb, cruise, descent, landing, response to rough air etc. Also included are requirements of stability,controllability and manoeuvrability.
2. Structural
Flight loads, ground loads, emergency landing conditions, fatigue evaluation etc.
3. Powerplant
Fire protection, auxillary power unit,air intake/exhaust,fuel systems,cooling.
4. Other
Materials quality regulations, bird strike.
Passenger Safety is the primary motive behind these specifications. Additional route-specific constraints may have to be taken into account on a
case-by-case basis. e.g, cruise altitude for aircrafts flying over the Himalayas
must be well over 8 km.
In addition to safety and operational requirements, the design must satisfy
the environmental constraints. Two major environmental concerns are noise
and emissions :
7

 The Engines are the primary source of noise in an aircraft. The airframe
could also add to this.Maximum noise is produced during take-off and
landing. This can reduced by opting for a shallower approach, as this
reduces the flight time spent near the airport. However the reduction in
noise may not be significant. The development of high-bypass turbofan
engines has significantly reduced noise production.
The predominant source of emissions is the engine. The exhaust contains particles, various gases including carbon dioxide(CO2 ) , water vapor (H2 O) , various oxides of nitrates, carbon monoxide(CO),unburnt
hydrocarbons and sulphur dioxide(SO2 ). All components except CO2
and H2 O are considered as pollutants Again,as was the case with noise,
emissions during landing and take-off are of particular concern due to
the communities near airports. Various aviation authorities have set
limits on these emissions. The design team must adhere to such constraints.

1.2

Preliminary Design

If we look at the commercial transport jets in use, one can find many common
features amongst them. Some of these are :
Medium bypass turbofans
This choice regarding the type of engine is due to the following reasons.
In the flight regime of Mach number between 0.6 to 0.85, turbofans give
the best efficiency and moreover reduction in thrust output with speed
is not so rapid. Also, the noise generated by a medium-by pass turbo
fan engine is considerably less. We follow this trend and choose a
medium-by pass turbo fan as our powerplant.
Wing mounted engines Though not a rule, wing mounted engines
dominate the designs of top aircraft companies like Boeing and Airbus.
Alternative designs could be adopted. But,given the experience gained
with the wing mounted engines and the large data available for such
configurations, we adopt two wing mounted engines.
Swept back wings and a conventional rear-tail configuration is chosen. Again, this choice is dictated by the fact that we have a large
amount of data(to compare with) for such configurations.

1.2.1

Preliminary Weight Estimate

Given the number of passengers, we can estimate the payload in the following
way:
1. Include one cabin crew member for 30 passengers. In our case, this
gives 5 crew members
2. Include flight crew of pilot and co-Pilot.
Thus the total of passenger + crew is 150+5+2 = 157.
3. Allow 110 kg for each passenger (82 kg weight per passenger with carry
on baggage + 28 kg of checkin baggage)(Reference 1.11, page 214)
We thus obtain a payload Wpay of 157 110 = 17270 kgf . We now estimate the gross weight of the aircraft (Wg ).
From data collection, we observe the following.
Aircraft No.of passengers Still air range (km) WT O (kgf )
737-300B
149
4185
60636
737-400B
168
3852
64671
737-700A
149
2935
60330
Table 2: Take off weight
Based on the data collected, we choose an initial weight of 60,000 kgf .
1.2.2

Wing parameters

To estimate the wing parameters, we need to choose a value for wing loading(W/S).
This is one of the most important parameters that not only decides the wing
parameters but also plays an important role in the performance of the airplane.We observe similar airplanes and choose an initial estimate for (W/S)
to be 5500 N/m2 .Once the (W/S) has been decided, the other parameters
of the wing are chosen based on similar aircraft.
Aerodynamically, it is desirable to have a large aspect ratio(A). However, structural considerations force us to settle for an optimal value. As the
structural design improves, the value of A also keeps increasing. We choose
a value of 9.3. Most modern aircrafts(see data base in Table A) have values
close to 9.The taper ratio() is a geometric parameter that is roughly the
9

same for all the aircrafts in the data set. We choose an average value of 0.24
for .The wing quarter chord sweep(c/4 ) is chosen as 25 .Consequently

S = Wg

S
W

= 107.02m2

(1)

The wing span(b) can be calculated from A and S

b=

SA = 31.55 m

(2)

The root chord(cr ) and tip chord(ct ) can now be found using the following
equations :
cr =

2S
= 5.47 m
b(1 + )

ct = cr = 1.31 m
1.2.3

(3)
(4)

Empennage

As explained earlier,we have chosen the conventional rear-tail configuration.

The geometric parameters of the horizontal and vertical tails are obtained
here.
The values of Sh /S and Sv /S are obtained from the data set of similar
airplanes.
We have chosen
Sh
= 0.31
S
Sv
= 0.21
S
Hence,
Sh = 33.18 m2
Sv = 22.47 m2
We choose suitable aspect ratios(Ah , Av ) from the data set. Our choices
are Ah = 5 and Av = 1.7. Using eq.(2), we get the spans(bh , bv ) as
p
bh = Ah Sh = 12.88 m
(5)
10

bv =

Av Sv = 6.18 m

(6)

The chosen values for the taper ratios(h , v ) from the data set are h =
0.26 v = 0.3. We can now compute the root chord (crh , crv ) and tip chord
(cth , ctv ) of tails as
crh =

2Sh
= 4.09 m
bh (1 + h )

cth = h crh = 1.06 m

crv =

2Sv
= 5.59 m
bv (1 + v )

ctv = v crv = 1.68 m

(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)

From the data set, we choose quarter chord sweep back angles of h = 30
and v = 35 . This completes the broad geometric design of the empennage.
1.2.4

Control Surfaces

A number of aircraft and their 3-view drawings as well as design data have
been studied and the following parameter values are chosen.
Sf lap /S = 0.17
Sslat /S = 0.10
bf lap /b =0.74
Sele /Sht = 0.22
Srud /Svt = 0.25
Trailing edge flaps type : Fowler flaps
Leading edge high lift devices : slats
Hence,
Sele = 7.53 m2
Srud = 5.8 m2
Area of T.E flaps = 18.98 m2
Area of L.E slats = 11.60 m2
bf lap = 23.7 m
11

1.2.5

Fuselage

Aerodynamic considerations would demand a slender fuselage. But, passenger comfort and structural constraints would limit the slenderness. We
obtain the length lf and diameter df by choosing lf /b = 1.05 and lf /df =
8.86 from data collection.
Hence,

1.2.6

lf = 33.6 m

(11)

df = 3.79 m

(12)

Engines

Observing the thrust-to-weight ratio (T/W) of similar airplanes, we arrive

at a T/W of 0.3.This implies a thrust requirement of
T = 0.3 Wg = 180 kN or 90 kN per engine
The CFMI FM56-3-B1 model of Turbofan comes closest to this requirement.
1.2.7

Landing Gear

We choose a retractable tricycle type landing gear. It is the most commonly

found type of landing gear. It is favored for two reasons:
1. During take-off and landing the weight of the plane is taken entirely by
the rear wheels.
2. It has better lateral stability on ground than bicycle type landing gear.
We choose to have a total of 10 wheels - 2 below the nose and two pairs
each on the sides(near the wing fuselage junction). The location of the wheels
was chosen from three-view drawings of similar aircraft.

1.3

Overall height

Based on dimensions of Boeing 737 - 300, 400 and 500, the overall height is
taken as 11.13 m.

12

TABLE A - Data on Existing Airplanes(150 seater category)

(Source : http://www.bh.com/companions/034074152X/)

13

14

15

16

17

Figure 1: Three view drawing of Boeing 737-300

Source : http://www.virtualswa.com/Boeing737-300/3view.gif

Figure 2: Three view drawing of Boeing 737-500

Source : http://www.virtualswa.com/Boeing737-500/3view.gif

18

Figure 3: Three view drawing of Boeing 737-700

Source : http://www.virtualswa.com/Boeing737-700/3view.gif

19

20
Figure 4: Preliminary three view of the airplane under design

Revised Weight Estimation

In the previous section, an initial estimate for the aircraft parameters has
been done. The weight estimate is being revised using refined estimates
of fuel weight and empty weight. The fuel fractions for various phases are
worked out in the following steps. The fuel fractions for warm-up, take-off,
climb and landing are taken from Raymer[4], chapter 3.

2.1

Fuel fraction estimation

The fuel weight depends on the mission profile and the fuel required as reserve. The mission profile for a civil jet transport aircraft involves
Take off
Climb
Cruise
Loiter before landing
Descent
Landing
2.1.1

Warm up and Take off

The value for this stage is taken by following the standards given in Raymer[4],
chapter 3
W1
= 0.97
W0
W0 is the weight at take-off and W1 is the weight at the end of the take-off
phase.
2.1.2

Climb

The weight-ratio for this stage is chosen by following the standards given in
Raymer[4], chapter 3.
W2
= 0.985
W1

21

2.1.3

Cruise

The weight ratio for the cruise phase of flight is calculated using the following
expression from Raymer[4], chapter 3.


W3
RC
= exp
(13)
W2
V (L/D)
Gross still air range is 4000 km.Hence
GSAR
4000
=
= 2667 km
1.5
1.5
(L/D)max is taken as 18 from figure 3.6 of Raymer[4]. This corresponds
to the average value for civil jets.
As prescribed by Raymer[4], chapter 3
Cruise Saf e Range =

(L/D)cruise = 0.866(L/D)max

(14)

(L/D)cruise = 0.866 18 = 15.54

To account for allowances due to head wind during cruise and provision
for diversion to another airport we proceed as follows.
Head wind is taken as 15 m/s. The time to cover the cruise safe range of
2667 km at Vcr of 849.6 km/hr is
2667
= 3.13 hours
849.6
Therefore, with a head wind of 15 m/s or 54 km/hr the additional distance that has to be accounted for is
T ime =

Additional distance = 54 3.13 = 169 km

The allowance for diversion to another airport is taken as 400 km.
The total extra distance that has to be accounted for in the calculations
is 169 + 400 = 569 km.
The total distance during cruise = 2667 + 569 = 3236 km.
Substituting the appropriate values in eq.(13) we get,


W3
3236 0.6
= exp
= 0.863
W2
849.6 15.59

22

2.1.4

Loiter

The weight ratio for Loiter phase of flight is calculated using the following
expression from Raymer[4], chapter 3


W4
E T SF C
= exp
(15)
W3
(L/D)
During Loiter, the airplane usually operates at (L/D)max and hence the
appropriate value should be used in eq.(15). Also, we design for a loiter time
of 30 minutes.
Therefore we get,


0.5 0.6
W4
= exp
= 0.983
W3
18
2.1.5

Landing

Following the standards specified by Raymer[4], chapter 3, we take this ratio

as
W5
= 0.995
W4
Therefore,
W5
W5
=
= 0.97 0.985 0.863 0.983 0.995 = 0.806
Wg
W0
Allowing for a reserve fuel of 6% we obtain the fuel fraction() as


Wf
W5
= = 1.06 1
= 0.205
Wg
W0

2.2

Empty Weight Fraction

To determine the empty weight ratio, we follow the method in Raymer[4],

chapter 3 which gives a relation between We /Wg and Wg as follows.
We
= 1.02(2.202Wg )0.06
Wg
where Wg is in kgf .

23

(16)

Hence,

Wg =

17270
Wpay
=
1 Wf /Wg We /Wg
1 0.205 1.202(2.202Wg )0.06

We solve this equation by iteration

Wg (guess) We /Wg (f rom eq.(16)) Wg (f rom eq.(16A))
60000
0.50274
59090
59090
0.50320
59184
59184
0.50315
59174
59174
0.50316
59175
59175
0.50316
59175
Table 3: Iterative procedure for Wg

Hence, the gross weight Wg is obtained as

Wg = 59, 175 kgf
The critical weight ratios are
We
= 0.503
Wg
Wf
= 0.205
Wg
Wpay
= 0.292
Wg

24

(16A)

Wing Loading and Thrust Loading

The thrust-to-weight ratio (T /W ) and the wing loading(W/S) are the two
most important parameters affecting aircraft performance. Optimization of
these parameters forms a major part of the design activities conducted after
initial weight estimation. For example, if the wing loading used for the initial
layout is low, then the area would be large and there would be enough space
for the landing gear and fuel tanks. However it results in a heavier wing.
Wing loading and thrust-to-weight ratio are interconnected for a number
of critical performance items, such as take-off distance, maximum speed etc.
These are often the design drivers. A requirement for short takeoff can be
met by using a large wing (low W/S) with a relatively low T /W . On the
other hand, the same takeoff distance could be met with a high W/S along
with a higher T /W .
In this section, we use different criteria and optimize the wing loading
and thrust loading.
Wing loading affects stalling speed, climb rate,takeoff and landing distances, minimum fuel required and turn performance.
Similarly, a higher thrust loading would result in more cost which is undesirable. However it would also lead to enhanced climb performance.
Hence a trade-off is needed while choosing W/S and T /W . Optimization
of W/S and T /W based on various considerations is carried out in the following subsections.

3.1

Landing Distance Consideration

To decide the wing loading from landing distance consideration we need

to choose the landing field length. Based on data collection of similar aircraft(Table A) the landing field length is chosen to be 1425 m.

sLand = 1425 m
Next,we choose the CLmax of the airplane. The Maximum lift coefficient
depends upon the wing geometry,airfoil shape,flap geometry and span,leading
edge slot or slat geometry,Reynolds number,surface texture and interference

25

from other parts of the aircraft such as the fuselage,nacelles or pylons.

Raymer[4], chapter 5 provides a chart for CLmax as a function of c/4 for
different types of high lift devices(figure 5.3 of Raymer[4]). For our airplane
we decided to use Fowler flap and slat as the high lift devices. This gives us
a CLmax of 2.5 for a c/4 = 25o .
CLmax = 2.5
To calculate W/S based on landing considerations,we use the formula
1
W
= Vs2 CLmax
S
2
The stalling speed Vs is estimated in the following way,

(17)

sLand = 1425 m
The approach speed (Va ) in knots is related to the landing distance(sLand )
in feet as,
r
sLand
Va (in knots) =
= 128.34 knots = 64.17 ms1
0.3
From the approach speed, the stalling speed can be calculated,
Vs =

Va
= 49 ms1
0.3

Now, using this value for Vs in eq.(17),

 
W
= 3743 N m2
S Land
Since WLand = 0.85Wt.o the W/S at take-off is,
 
 
W
1
W
=
= 4403 N m2
S t.o 0.85 S Land
Allowing a 10 % variation in Vs we get a range of wing loading as
3639 < p < 5328 N/m2

26

(18)

3.2

Maximum Speed(Vmax ) Consideration

Generally the Mmax is determined as follows

Mmax = Mcr + 0.04
Hence,for our airplane,
Mmax = 0.80 + 0.04 = 0.84
The drag polar is generally expressed as
CD = CD0 + KCL2

(19)

where,
K=

1
Ae

(20)

CD0 for the airplane is given as

CD0 = Cfe

Swet
S

(21)

Swet /S = 6.33 from Fig 2.5 of Raymer[4].

3.2.1

Estimation of K

We estimate e from Roskam[6], chapter 2

1
1
1
=
+
+ 0.05
e
ewing ef use

(22)

ewing = 0.84 for unswept wing of A = 9.3 and = 0.25.

Hence,ewing for the swept wing is
ewing = 0.84 cos( 5) = 0.84 cos(25 5) = 0.7893
1
ef use

= 0.1

Hence,
1
1
=
+ 0.1 + 0.05 = 1.417
e
0.7893
e = 0.707
27

(23)

1
= 0.0482
9.3 0.707
To get CD0 we note from figure 3.6 of Raymer[4] that (L/D)max =18.This
has already been used in section 2.
K=

1
(L/D)max = p
2 CD0 K

(24)

Hence,
CD0 =

1
1
=
= 0.0161
2
4K(L/D)max
4 0.0482 182

Further,
CD0 = Cf e

Swet
S

(25)

gives,
Cf e =

0.0161
= 0.00254
6.33

Hence, the drag polar is

CD0 = 0.0161 + 0.0482CL2
To obtain the optimum W/S based on maximum speed,we the follow
method given in Lebedinski[7], chapter IV of writing the drag polar as a
function of p (=W/S)
CD = F1 + F2 p + F3 p

(26)

where,

F1 = Cf e

Sht Svt
+
1+
S
S
F2 =



Swet
S


= Cf e Kt

(27)

(CDo F1 )
W/S

(28)

K
q2

(29)

F3 =

To calculate F1 , F2 , F3 values for our airplane we proceed as follows.

28

From our preliminary estimations ,

Sht
= 0.31
S
Svt
= 0.21
S
Hence,
Sht Svt
+
= 1.52
S
S


Swet(exposed)
= Cf e
S
W

Kt = 1 +



CDo
W

(30)

To calculate (Swet(exposed) /S)W we need to obtain dimensions of the exposed wing.We proceed as follows. From preliminary estimate in section 1
S = 107.02 m2
= 0.24
A = 9.3
cr = 5.47 m
ct = 1.31 m
c/4 = 25
Hence, for the equivalent trapezoidal wing, the chord distribution is given
by
cr ct
y
b/2
= 5.47 0.264y

c(y) = cr

Taking fuselage diameter of 3.79 m, the chord at y = 1.895 m is

cr(exposed) = 4.97 m
bexposedwing = 15.78

29

3.79
= 13.89 m
2

Swet = 2Sexposed 1 + 1.2(t/c)avg

(31)

1
Sexposedwing = (4.97 + 1.31) 13.89 2 = 87.23 m2
2
Assuming (t/c)avg of 12.5%


Swet(exposedwing) = 2 1 + 1.2(0.125) 87.23 = 200.63 m2
Hence,
(CDo )W = 0.0025

200.63
= 0.004687
107.02

F1 = 1.52 0.004687 = 0.007124

We also know that the drag polar is
CD = 0.0161 + 0.0482CL2

F2 =

CDo F1
= 1.632 106 m2 /N
W/S

The above drag polar will not be valid at M greater than the Mcruise .
Hence we need to estimate the drag polar (values of CDo and K) at Mmax .
The drag divergence Mach number(MDD ) for the aircraft is fixed at M = 0.82
which is 0.02 greater than Mcruise . This would ensure that there is no wave
drag at Mcruise of 0.80. To estimate the increase in CDo from M = 0.80 to
M = 0.84, we make a reasonable assumption that the slope of the CDo Vs
M curve remains constant in the region between M = 0.82 and M = 0.84.
The value of this slope is 0.1 at M = 0.82. Hence, the increase in CDo is
estimated as 0.02 0.1 = 0.002.
From the data on B 787 available in website[2] we observe that the variation in K is not significant in the range M = 0.82 to M = 0.84. Hence,value
of K is retained as in subcritical flow. However better estimates are used in
performance calculations presented later.
Consequently the drag polar that is valid at Mmax is estimated as
CD = 0.0181 + 0.0482CL2

30

(32)

The change in the CDo is largely due to change in the zero lift drag of the
wing, horizontal tail and vertical tail. This means that the change in CDo
affects F1 value alone.
Hence at Mmax
F1 = 0.009124
The value of F3 depends on the dynamic pressure at Vmax .
Vmax = Mmax

p
speed of sound at hcruise = 0.84 295.2 = 248.1m/s

1 2
qmax = Vmax
= 0.5 0.364 2482 = 11200.95
2
0.0482
= 3.84 1010 m4 /N 2
11200.952
To obtain the optimum value of W/S, we minimize the thrust required
for Vmax . The relation between t(ie T /W ) and p is


F1
tVmax = qmax
+ F2 + F3 p
(33)
p
F3 =

On minimizing tVmax , we get

r
poptimum =

F1
F3

0.009124
= 4873.31N/m2
3.84 1010
is found from eq.(33) as

poptimum =
The tVmax value at popt

tVmax = 0.06022
Allowing a 5 % extra thrust and using the new tVmax in eq. (33) gives two
values of p viz.
p1 = 3344 N m2
p2 = 7101 N m2
Thus, any p between p1 and p2 would be acceptable from Vmax considerations with a maximum of 5% deviation from optimum.
3344 < p < 7101 N/m2
31

3.3

(R/C)max consideration

The value for (R/C)max at sea level was chosen as 700 m/min (11.67 m/s)
which is typical for passenger airplanes.The thrust required for climb at chosen flight speed(V ) is related to (R/C) in the following way(section 4.2.4 of
text).
tR/c =

R/C q
+ CD
V
p

(34)

But, CD is

tR/C =

CD = F1 + F2 p + F3 p2

(35)

1
q = 0 V 2
2

(36)

R/C 1
V2
+ 0 (F1 + F2 p + F3 p2 )
V
2
p

(37)

The flight speed for optimum climb performance is not high and values
of F1 and F2 correspond to their values for M < Mcruise . F3 is a function of
the dynamic pressure.
Our motive is to find the minimum sea level static thrust (tsR/c ) for various
values of V and then choose the minimum amongst the minima. For a given
V,
r
F1
popt =
F3
Therefore, a table is prepared for different values of velocity(Table 4)
and the corresponding tR/C is obtained using eq.(37) and the corresponding
value of F3 . This tR/C is converted to tsR/C by using the plots provided in
Reference 1.13, chapter 9. These plots provide the climb thrust variation for
engine with bypass ratio 6.5 as a function of velocity and altitude. Using
these plots,the tR/C is converted to tsR/C .

32

V (m/s)
80
100
120
140
150
160
170
180
190
200

popt
1507
2355
3391
4615
5298
6028
6805
7629
8500
9419

tR/C
0.1893
0.1637
0.1487
0.14
0.1373
0.1356
0.1346
0.1343
0.1345
0.1354

tsR/C
0.2868
0.2641
0.2507
0.2469
0.2483
0.2510
0.2554
0.2617
0.2691
0.2780

Table 4: Variation of tR/C with p for (R/C)max

We observe that the value of tsR/C remains low and almost constant for
a range of V values from 120 to 170 m/s. This provides a range of values of
p as given below
p1 = 3391 N/m2
p2 = 6793 N/m2
Therefore, for
3391 < p < 6805 N/m2
the climb performance is near the optimum.

3.4

Based on Minimum Fuel for Range (Wfmin )

In cruise flight, the weight of the fuel used (Wf ) is related to the range(R)
and wing loading(p) as follows(section 4.2.5 of [5])
r


R 0
F1

Wf =
T SF C q
+ F2 + F3 p
(38)
3.6 2
p
The values of F1 , F2 , F3 corresponding to cruise conditions are as follows
F1 = 0.007124
F2 = 1.632 106
33

Vcruise = Mcruise 295.2 = 0.8 295.2 = 236.3 m/s

qcruise = 0.5 V 2 = 0.5 0.364 236.32 = 10159.59 N/m2

F3 =

0.0482
= 4.67 1010 m4 /N 2
10159.59

Using eq.(38) we minimize W f and obtain poptimum as

r
F1
poptimum =
F3
r
0.007124
poptimum =
= 3905.84 N/m2
4.67 1010

(39)

Using this value of p in eq.(38) along with R = 4000 km and T SF C =

0.6hr1 , we get W f min as
W f min = 0.1514
Allowing an excess fuel of 5 % i.e. W fmin = 0.1590 and using eq.(38) we
get two values p1 and p2 as
p1 = 2676 N/m2
p2 = 5700 N/m2
Thus, any p within p1 and p2 would be acceptable from the point of view
of minimizing W f .
2676 < p < 5700N/m2

3.5

Based on Absolute Ceiling

At absolute ceiling, the flight is possible at only one speed. Observing the
trend of Hmax as hcruise + 0.6 km we choose the absolute ceiling to be Hmax
= 11.6 km. To find the tHmax , we solve the following two equations(section
4.2.3 of [5]).

34

p
4K(F1 + F2 p)


F1
+ F2
th = 2qhmax
p
th =

(40)
(41)

The F1 and F2 values corresponding to this case are

F1 = 0.007124
F2 = 1.632 106
In the absence of a prescribed velocity at Hmax , the velocity corresponding
to flight at (L/D)max is taken to calculate qmax . CL value corresponding to
flight at (L/D)max is given by
r
r
CDo
0.016
CL =
=
= 0.577
(42)
K
0.048
qhmax =

(W/S)
5500
= 9532.06
=
CL
0.577

The solution for popt is obtained by solving eqs.(40) and (41).

popt = 5500 N m2 as it should be.
thmax corresponding to poptimum is
thmax = 0.05581
Allowing a 5 % variation in Thrust, we get
thmax1 = 0.05302
thmax2 = 0.05860
The solutions to eq.(40) with the new thmax values are
p1 = 4567 N m2
p2 = 6547 N m2
Similarly, using in eq.(41), we get
35

p1 = 4942 N m2
p2 = 6201 N m2
From the above four values, the final lower and upper bounds from the
ceiling considerations are
p1 = 4942 N m2
p2 = 6201 N m2
4942 < p < 6201 N/m2

3.6

Summary of Constraints

We now tabulate the various constraints on the choice of W/S

Performance Criteria Allowable range of W/S in (N m2 )
sLand
3639 - 5328
Vmax
3344 - 7101
(R/C)max
3391 - 6805
Wf
2676 - 5700
hmax
4942 - 6201
Table 5: Choice of (W/S)
From the table, we see that the allowable range of W/S values is
4942 < p < 5328 N/m2

3.7

Consideration of Wing Weight (Ww )

The weight of the wing depends on its area. According to Raymer[4], chapter
15, for passenger airplanes, the weight of the wing is proportional to S 0.649 .
Thus a wing with lower area will be lighter and for lower wing area, the W/S
must be higher. Hence we examine the advantage of choosing a higher wing
loading than that indicated by minimum fuel requirement. It may be pointed
out that the weight of wing structure is about 12% of Wg .

36

The optimum W/S from range consideration is 3906 N/m2 whereas with
a 5% increase in Wf , the wing loading could go up to 5700 N/m2 . If the
wing loading of 5700 N/m2 is chosen, instead of 3906 N/m2 , the weight of
the wing would decrease by a factor of

0.649
3906
= 0.782
5700
Taking weight of the wing as 12% of Wg , the saving in the wing weight
will be 2.6%. However this higher wing loading will result in an increase in
the fuel by 5% of Wg . In the present case, Wf would be around 20% and
hence 5% of Wf means an increase in the weight by 0.05 0.2 = 1%.
Thus by increasing W/S from 3906 to 5700 N/m2 , the saving in the Wg
would be around 2.6 - 1 = 1.6%. Thus it is advantageous to have higher
W/S.

3.8

Choosing a W/S

We see from the Table 5 that a wide range of p is permissible which will still
satisfy various requirement with permissible deviations from the optimum.
To arrive at the final choice we consider the take-off requirement and choose
highest wing loading which would permit take-off within permissible distance
without excessive (T/W) requirement. From data collection, the take-off
distance, balanced field length, is assumed to be 2150 m. From figure 5.4
of Raymer(Reference 1.11) the take-off parameter {(W/S)/CLt.o (T /W )} for
this field length is 180. With (W/S) in lb/f t2 . We take = 1 (take-off at sea
level),CLt.o = 0.8 CLmax = 0.8 2.5 = 2. Generally these types of aircraft
have (T/W) of 0.3.Substituting these values we get,
pf inal = 108.2 lb/f t2 = 5195 N m2
It is reassuring that this value of p lies within the permissible values
summarized in Table 5.

3.9

Thrust Requirements

After selecting the W/S for the aircraft, the thrust needed for various design
requirements is obtained. These requirements decide the choice of engine.

37

3.9.1

Requirement for Vmax

We use the chosen value of p in the following equation

tVmax = qmax (

F1
+ F2 + F3 p)
p

and get the thrust required for Vmax at cruise altitude as

 
T
= 0.0602
W Mmax

(43)

(44)

Referring to engine charts in Jenkinson[8], chapter 9, for a turbo fan

engine with bypass ratio of 6.5, the sea level static thrust is
T
0.0602
=
= 0.334
W
0.18
In our case, this would mean a Thrust requirement of

(45)

Treq = 193.9 kN

3.10

Requirements for (R/C)max

As in the case for Vmax , we use our final design choice for (W/S) in the
following equation,
tR/c =

R/C 1
V2
+ 0 (F1 + F2 p + F3 p2 )
V
2
p

Substituting appropriate values, we get

 
T
= 0.252
W R/C

(46)

(47)

In our case, this would mean a thrust requirement of

Treq = 146.3kN

3.11

Take-Off Thrust Requirements

The take of (T /W ) is taken to be 0.3(choice is motivated by similar aircraft).

This implies a thrust requirement of
Tto = 0.3 Wg = 174.2 kN

38

3.12

Engine Choice

From the previous section, we see that the max. Thrust requirements occurs
from Take off considerations.
Tmax = 193.9 kN
As we have adopted a twin engine design, this means a per engine thrust
of
Tmax = 96.95 kN/engine
We look for an engine which supplies this thrust and has a TSFC of
0.6hr1 and bypass ratio of around 6.5. Some of the engines with performance close to these numbers are taken from Jenkinson[8], chapter 9 and
website[1].
Finally, we chose CFM56-2B model of turbofan with a sea level static
thrust of 97.9 kN as this engine satisfies nearly all our requirements.

3.13

Engine Characteristics

For performance analysis, the variation of thrust and TSFC with speed and
altitude are required. Jenkinson[8], chapter 9 has given non dimensional
charts for turbo fan engines with different bypass ratios. Choosing the charts
for bypass ratio = 6.5 and sea level static thrust of 97.9kN , the engine curves
are presented below.

39

40
Figure 5: Cruise Thrust per engine for various altitudes

41

Figure 6: Variation of Climb Thrust with Altitude and Mach No.(Bypass ratio = 6.5)

Wing Design

4.1

Introduction

The weight and the wing loading of the airplane have been obtained in sections 2 and 3 as 59175 kgf (579915 N ) and 5195 N/m2 . These give wing area
as 111.63 m2 . The wing design involves choosing the following parameters.
1. Airfoil selection
2. Aspect ratio
3. Sweep
4. Taper ratio
5. Twist
6. Incidence
7. Dihedral
8. Vertical location
In the following subsections, the factors affecting the choice of parameters
are mentioned and then the choices are effected.

4.2

Airfoil Selection

The airfoil shape influences CLmax , CDmin , CLopt , Cmac and stall pattern.
These in turn influence stalling speed, fuel consumption during cruise, turning performance and weight of the airplane.
For high subsonic airplanes, the drag divergence Mach number(MDD ) is
an important consideration. It may be recalled that (MDD ) is the Mach
number at which the increase in the drag coefficient is 0.002 above the value
at low subsonic Mach numbers. A supercritical airfoil is designed to increase
MDD . NASA has carried out tests on several supercritical airfoils and recommends the use of NASA-SC(2) series airfoil with appropriate thickness ratio
and camber.

42

4.2.1

Design Lift Coefficient

The airfoil will have a Clopt at which its drag coefficient is minimum. For
general design the airfoil is chosen in such a way that the CLcruise of the
airplane is equal to the Clopt of the airfoil.
CLcruise =

(W/S)
qcruise

(48)

Using the value of (W/S) = 5195 N m2 and the q corresponding to

M = 0.8 at 11 km altitude, we get
Clcruise = 0.512

(49)

For choice of thickness ratio and wing sweep, we take Clopt = 0.5.
4.2.2

Airfoil Thickness Ratio and Wing Sweep

Airfoil thickness ratio(t/c) has a direct influence on drag, maximum lift, stall
characteristics, structural weight and critical Mach number. A higher t/c implies a lower critical Mach number but also a lower wing weight.Thus we need
to choose an optimum t/c for the airfoil.
Clopt = 0.5 has been chosen and the cruise Mach number is 0.8. In order
to ensure that the drag divergence Mach number is greater than Mcruise , we
choose MDD as 0.82. This is based on the consideration that there should
be no increase in drag at Mcruise , CDwave is 0.002 at MDD and the slope of
the CD Vs M curve around MDD is 0.1 . NASA[3] gives experimental results
for several super-critical airfoils with different (t/c) and Clopt . Curves for
Clopt = 0.4, 0.7, 1.0 are available in the aforesaid report. We interpolate and
obtain the curve for Clopt = 0.5.
The MDD for the wing can be estimated in the following manner.
MDD = (MDD )a/f + MA + M

(50)

where MA and M are corrections for influences of the aspect ratio

and the sweep.
The change in MDD with A is almost zero for A > 8. Since we have
chosen A = 9.3, the second term in the above equation will not contribute to
MDD . Further from Hoerner[9], chapter 15, the change in MDD due to sweep
is given as
1 MDD

=
(51)
1
90
1 M=0
43

The supercritical airfoil with (t/c) = 14% has MDD = 0.74 at CLopt of
0.5. Using this in eq.(51) we obtain which would give MDD of 0.82,
1

1 0.82
=
90
1 0.74

= 27.7
The average thickness has been arrived at as 14 %. However, to reduce
structural weight, the (t/c)root is increased and the (t/c)tip is decreased, Considering the features for Airbus A310 and Boeing B 767 which have
Mcr = 0.8 and similar values of c/4 , it is decided that the variation of (t/c)
along span be such that (t/c) of 15.2% at root, (t/c) of 11.8% at spanwise
location of the thickness break and (t/c) of 10.3% at the tip.
Thickness break location is the spanwise location upto which the trailing
edge is straight. From the data collection this location is at 34% of semispan.

4.3
4.3.1

Other Parameters
Aspect Ratio

The aspect ratio affects CL , CDi and wing weight. The value of CL decreases as A decreases. For example, in the case of an elliptic wing,
CL =

A
(Cl )a/f
A+2

(52)

The induced drag coefficient can be expressed as

CDi =

CL2
(1 + )
A

(53)

where depends on A, and . A high A increases the span of the wing

which in turn requires more space in the hangar. A higher Aspect ratio would
also result in poor riding quality in turbulent weather. All these factors need
careful optimization. However at the present stage of design we choose
A = 9.3 based on trends indicated by data collection.
Correspondingly, the wing span would be

b = AS = 32.22m

44

4.3.2

Taper Ratio

Wing taper ratio is defined as the ratio between the tip chord and the centerline root chord. Taper ratio affects the
Induced drag
Weight
Tip stalling
Induced drag is low for taper ratios between 0.3-0.5. Lower the taper ratio,
lower is the weight. A swept wing also has higher structural weight than
unswept wing. Since the present airplane has a swept wing, a taper ratio of
0.24 has been chosen based on the trends of current swept wing airplanes.
4.3.3

Root and Tip Chords

Root chord and tip chord of the equivalent trapezoidal wing can now be
evaluated.
2S
= 5.59 m
b(1 + )
ct = cr = 1.34 m
2 (1 + + 2 )
c =
cr = 3.9 m
3 (1 + )

cr =

Location of the quarter chord of the mac from wing leading edge at the
root is 4.76 m
4.3.4

Dihedral

The Dihedral is the angle of the wing with respect to the horizontal when
seen in the front view .Dihedral of the wing affects the lateral stability of the
airplane.Since there is no simple technique for arriving at the dihedral angle
that takes all the considerations into effect we need to initially choose a dihedral angle based on data collected(Table A). Hence we choose a reasonable
value for the dihedral as
= 5o
4.3.5

Wing Twist

We have assumed a linear twist of 3o .

45

4.4

Cranked Wing Design

If we observe the design of current high subsonic airplanes, we see that the
trailing edge is straight for a part of the span, in the inboard region. A
larger chord in the inboard region has the following advantages
1. more space for fuel and landing gear
2. the lift distribution is changed such that more lift is produced in the
inboard section which reduce the bending moment in the root.
This type of design is called a wing with cranked trailing edge. The value
of the span upto which the trailing edge is straight has to be obtained by
optimization. However at the present stage of design, based on the current
trends, the trailing edge is made unswept till 35% of semi span. Root chord
of the cranked wing is
crcranked = 7.44 m
Span of wing portion with unswept trailing edge = 0.35 32.22 = 11.28 m

Figure 7: Plan View of Cranked Wing

46

4.5

Wing Incidence(iw )

The wing incidence angle is the angle between wing reference chord and
fuselage reference line. Wing incidence angle is chosen to minimize drag at
some operating conditions,usually cruise.The incidence angle is chosen such
that when the wing is at the correct angle of attack for the selected design
condition,the fuselage is at the angle of attack for minimum drag(usually at
zero angle of attack). Usually wing incidence is ultimately set using wind
tunnel data.However, for an initial estimate for our preliminary design we
proceed as follows
CLcruise = CL (iw 0L )

(54)

In the present case,

CLcruise = 0.512
CL is computed using the following formula in Raymer[4], chapter 12,
CL =

Sexp
)(F )
A2 2
S
tan2 max
ref
(1 +
)
2
2
2A

q
2+ 4+

(55)

where,
2 = 1 M 2
= 1
2

d
F = 1.07 1 +
b
Sexp = area of exposed wing
Substituting various values, we get
CL = 6.276 rad1
L=0 for the airfoil was calculated using camber line of the supercritical
airfoil with 14% thickness ratio. The value is 5.8 . Substituting the values
yields a value of iw which is negative. This can be attributed to the fact that
the airplane is flexible. Hence the value of iw is chosen from similar airplanes.
iw = 1
which is the value recommended in Raymer[4], chapter 4.

4.6

Vertical Location of Wing

The wing vertical location for the designed airplane has been chosen to be a
low wing configuration which is typical of similar airplanes.
47

4.7

Areas of Flaps and Ailerons

These areas are chosen based on the initial data collection of similar aircraft.
1. Trailing edge : Fowler flaps.
2. Leading edge : full span slats.
We choose

Sf lap
= 0.17
S
Sslat
= 0.1
S
Sail
= 0.03
S

5
5.1

Fuselage and Tail Layout

Introduction

The fuselage layout is important in the design process as the length of the
airplane depends on this.The length and diameter of the fuselage are related
to the seating arrangement.
The Fuselage of a passenger airplane can be divided into four basic sections viz. nose, cockpit, payload compartment and tail fuselage. In this
section, the fuselage design is carried out by choosing the various parameters.

5.2

Initial Estimate of Fuselage Length

By observing the lf /b of similar airplanes, we get the first estimate of lf

for the present case. The lf /b value chosen is 1.05. Using b = 32.22m as
obtained from wing design, the Fuselage length is 33.83 m.
Raymer[4], chapter 6 provides a relation between gross weight and length of
fuselage as follows.
lf = aWoc

48

(56)

where Wo is in lbs and lf in f t. For a jet transport airplane, a = 0.67

and c = 0.43. Using Wo = 59175 2.205 lbf , an lf of 31.83 m is obtained.
This is in good agreement of the value obtained based on data collection.

5.3

Nose and Cockpit - Front Fuselage

The front fuselage accommodates the forward looking radar in the nose section, the flight deck with associated windscreen, and the nose undercarriage.
Anthropometric data for flight crews has provided the basis for the arrangement of pilots seats, instruments and controls. Development of electronic
displays has transformed the traditional layout of the flight deck. The aircraft must be capable of being flown from either pilot seat position; therefore
the wind screen and front geometry will be symmetrical about the aircraft
longitudinal center line. Modern glass cockpit displays and side stick controllers have transformed the layout of the flight deck from the traditional
aircraft configuration. The front fuselage profile presents a classical design
compromise between a smooth shape for low drag and the need to have flat
sloping windows to give good visibility. The layout of the flight deck and
the specified pilot window geometry is often the starting point of the overall
fuselage layout.
For the current design, the flight deck of various similar airplanes are
considered and the following value of lnose /lf and is chosen.
lnose
= 0.03
lf
For the cockpit length (lcockpit ), standards have been prescribed by Raymer
(Reference 1.11,chapter 9). lcockpit for the two member crew is chosen as 100
inches (2.5 m).
lcockpit = 2.5 m

5.4

Passenger Cabin Layout

Two major geometrical parameters that specify the passenger cabin are
Cabin Diameter and Cabin Length. These are in turn decided by more
specific details like number of seats, seat width, seating arrangement (number abreast), seat pitch, aisle width and number of aisles.

49

5.4.1

Cabin Cross Section

The shape of the fuselage cross section is dictated by the structural requirements for pressurization. A circular shell reacts the internal pressure loads
by hoop tension. This makes the circular section efficient and therefore lowest in structural weight. However a fully circular section may result in too
much unusable volume above or below the cabin space. This problem is
overcome by the use of several interconnecting circular sections to form the
cross-sectional layout. The parameters for the currently designed airplane
are arrived at by considering similar airplanes(Table A).
We choose a circular cross section for the fuselage.
The overall size must be kept small to reduce aircraft weight and drag,yet
the resulting shape must provide a comfortable and flexible cabin interior
which will appeal to the customer airlines. The main decision to be taken is
the number of seats abreast and the aisle arrangement.The number of seats
across will fix the number of rows in the cabin and thereby the fuselage
length.Design of the cabin cross section is further complicated by the need to
provide different classes like first class, business class, economy class etc.

5.4.2

Cabin length

Following the trend displayed by current aircraft, we choose to have two

classes viz Economy class and Business class.The total number of seats(150)
is distributed as 138 seats in the economy class and 12 seats in the business
class.
Cabin parameters are chosen based on standards for similar airplanes. The
various parameters chosen are as follows
Parameter
Economy Class
Seat Pitch (in inches)
32
Seat width (in inches)
20
Aisle width (in inches)
22
Seats abreast
6
Number of Aisles
1
Max. Height (in m)
2.2

Business class
38
22
24
4
1
2.2

Since the business class has a 4 abreast seating arrangement,the number

of rows required will be 3 and the economy class will have 23 rows.The cabin
length is found out by using the seat pitch for each of the classes.
50

Class
Economy
Business

No.of seats No.of rows

138
23
12
3

Seat Pitch (in) Cabin length(m)

32
18.4
38
2.85

Hence,the total cabin length will be 18.4 + 2.85 = 21.25 m.

5.4.3

Cabin Diameter

Using the number of seats abreast,seat width,aisle width we calculate the

internal diameter of the cabin.
df (internal) = 22 1 + 19 6 = 136 in = 3.4 m
According to the standards prescribed by Raymer[4], chapter 9, the structural thickness is given by
t = 0.02df + 100 = 0.02 136 + 1 = 3.72 in = 0.093 m
Therefore the external diameter of the fuselage is obtained as 3.4+0.093
2 = 3.59 m.

5.5

Rear Fuselage

The rear fuselage profile is chosen to provide a smooth, low drag shape which
supports the tail surfaces. The lower side of the profile must provide adequate clearance for aircraft when rotation during take off. The rear fuselage
should also house the auxillary power unit(APU).
Based on data collected for similar aircraft we choose the ratio ltail /lf as
0.25.

5.6

Total Fuselage Length

The cabin length and cockpit length have been decided to be 32.08 m and
3.3 m respectively.We have also chosen the ratios of nose and tail length with
respect to lf as 3% and 25%. Thus cabin and cockpit length form 72% of lf .
Hence the fuselage length is calculated as 23.75/0.72 = 33 m.The lengths of

51

various parts of the fuselage are indicated below

N ose
Cockpit
Cabin
Rear

5.7

length
length
length
length
T otal

=
=
=
=
=

1 m
2.5 m
21.25 m
8.25 m
33 m

Tail surfaces

The type and area of the tail surfaces are important in determining the stability of the airplane. A conventional tail arrangement is chosen. Some of
the important parameters that decide the aerodynamic characteristics of the
tail are area ratio (St /S), tail volume ratio(VH and VV ), tail arm, tail span
etc. All these parameters have to be decided for both the horizontal and
vertical tail.
From data collected on similar airplanes, we choose the following values
for the tail parameters.
Parameter
Horizontal Tail Vertical Tail
Area ratio (St /S)
0.31
0.21
Aspect ratio
5
1.7
Taper ratio
0.26
0.31
Area
The Areas of the horizontal and vertical tail(Sh and Sv ) are calculated
as
Sh = 0.31 111.63 = 34.61 m2
Sv = 0.21 111.63 = 23.44 m2
Span
The span of the horizontal and vertical tail (bh and bv ) are given as
p
bh =
Ah S h
(57)
p
bv =
Av S v
(58)

52

Taking ARH = 5 and ARV = 1.7, we get

bH = 13.15 m
bV = 6.31 m
Root and tip chords
The chord lengths of the horizontal and vertical tail are obtained as
2Sh
= 4.18 m
bh (1 + h )
2Sv
= 5.67 m
=
bv (1 + v )
= crh = 1.09 m
= crv = 1.76 m

crh =
crv
cth
ctv
Tail arm

Tail arm is the distance between the wing aerodynamics center and
the tail(horizontal or vertical) aerodynamic center.The value of the tail
arm is chosen based on data collection. ratio.
Choosing lh as 45% of lf and lv as 42% of lf yield,

lh = 14.85 m
lv = 13.86 m

Sh lh
Sc
Sv lv
=
Sb

VH =

(59)

VV

(60)

Hence,

VH = 1.18
VV = 0.09
53

5.8

Engine Location

The type of Engine mounting and its location play a major role in deciding
the overall drag coefficient of the airplane. A conventional wing mounted engine is chosen as it facilitates periodic maintenance in an industry where an
unscheduled downtime could mean huge losses to the airliners. The engines
are attached to the lower side of the wing using pylons to reduce drag. The
other reason for choosing a wing mounted engine is the fuel is stored in the
wings itself, thereby reducing the length of the fuel line.
From the data collection of similar airplanes, the engine location is fixed
at 34% of the semi span.

5.9

Landing Gear Arrangement

One of the principal moving parts on the aircraft is the landing gear. This
must be light, small, provide good ride dynamics during taxiing and safe energy absorption at touch down. It must be retractable to reduce drag during
flight. So housing of the landing gear is a space constraint.A conventional tricycle landing gear is chosen based on trend followed by similar aircraft. The
important parameters of this type of landing gear are wheel track, wheel base
and turning radius. The values of the parameters(shown below)were based
on data collected from similar aircraft.
Parameter
Wheel base (in m)
Track length (in m)
Turning radius (in m)

54

Value
13.2
5.8
19.3

Estimation of Component Weights and C.G

Location

Aircraft weight is a common factor which links different design activities

(aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, layout, airworthiness, environmental,
economic and operational aspects).To this end, at each stage of the design,a
check is made on the expected total mass of the completed aircraft. A separate design organization(weights department)is employed to assess and control weight.In the preliminary design stage,estimates have to made from historical statistical data of all the component parts of the aircraft from similar
airplanes. As parts are manufactured and the aircraft prototype reaches completion it is possible to check the accuracy of the estimates by weighing each
component and where necessary instigate weight reduction programmes.

6.1

Aircraft mass statement

The weight of the entire airplane can be sub-divided into empty weight and
useful load. The empty weight can be further subdivided into
Structures group
Propulsion group
Equipment group
DCPR(Defense Contractor Planning Report) weight is taken as the weight
obtained after deducting weights of wheels, brakes, tires, engines, starters,
batteries, equipments, avionics etc from the empty weight.DCPR weight is
important for cost estimation, and can be viewed as the weight of the parts of
the airplane that the manufacturer makes as opposed those of items bought
and installed.
It has become normal practice in aircraft design to list the various components of aircraft mass in a standard format.The components are grouped
in convenient subsections as shown below.
6.1.1

Structures Group

1. Wing(including control surfaces)

2. Tail(horizontal and vertical including controls)
3. Body(or fuselage)
55

4. Nacelles
5. Landing gear (main and nose units)
6. Surface controls
6.1.2

Propulsion Group

1. Engine(s)(dry weight)
2. Accessory gearbox and drives
3. Induction system
4. Exhaust system
5. Oil system and cooler
6. Fuel system
7. Engine controls
8. Starting system
9. Thrust reversers
6.1.3

Fixed equipment group

1. Auxiliary power unit

2. Flight control systems(sometimes included in structural group)
3. Instruments and navigation equipment
4. Hydraulic systems
5. Electrical systems
6. Avionics systems
7. Furnishing
8. Air conditioning and anti-icing
9. Oxygen system
10. Miscellaneous(e.g.fire protection and safety systems)
56

6.2

Weights of Various Components

After making the classification between various groups and listing the components in each group,we next proceed to determine the weights of these
components.
In the preliminary design stages it is not possible to know the size of individual aircraft components in great detail but it is possible to use prediction
methods that progressively become more accurate as the aircraft geometry
is developed.Most aircraft design textbooks contain a set of equations empirically derived based on existing aircraft. For the present design, we choose
to follow equations prescribed in Appendix 8.1 of [5]. Using these equations,
the weights of various individual components are calculated.

6.3
6.3.1

C.G Location and C.G Travel

Wing Location on Fuselage

The wing longitudinal location is decided based on the consideration the C.G
of the entire airplane with full payload and fuel is around the quarter chord
of the m.a.c.We tabulate the weights and the corresponding C.G locations
of various components and then apply moment equilibrium about the nose
of the airplane in order to solve for Xl.e (the distance of leading edge of root
chord of the wing from the nose).In tabulating the results,we assume that
the C.G locations of wing, horizontal tail and vertical tail are at 40% of the
respective m.a.c.The fuselage C.G is taken to be at 42% of its length.The
engine C.G location was taken to be at 40% of its length.The distance of
the engine C.G from the root chord was measured for various airplanes and
we chose a distance of 2 m.All other components were taken to have a net
C.G location at 42% of the fuselage length.The tabulated values are given
below.The nose wheel was placed at 14% of the fuselage length and the main
landing gear position was determined by using the wheelbase from section 5.
Remark
Using data for equivalent trapezoidal wing in section 4, the location
of wing c.g. is at 5.34 m behind the leading edge of the root chord.
The quarter chord of m.a.c is at 4.76 m behind the leading edge of root
chord.
Noting that the tail arm is 14.85 m and that the c.g of tail is 15 %
behind the a.c., the distance of horizontal tail c.g. from leading edge
57

of root chord of wing is 20.05 m. In a similar way, c.g. of vertical tail

is at 19.56 m behind leading edge of the root chord of wing.
Component
Wing
Fuselage
Horizontal tail
Vertical tail
Engine group
Nose Wheel
Main landing gear
Fixed equipment total
Fuel
Payload
Gross Weight

Weight(kg) C.G Location from Nose(m)

5855.41
Xle +5.34
6606.60
13.86
1160.94
Xle +20.05
746.22
Xle +19.56
5659.19
Xle +2
363.18
4.62
1961.25
17.82
7421.09
13.86
12130.88
Xle +4.76
17270
14.13
59175
Xle +4.76

By applying moment equilibrium about the nose of the airplane,we obtain

location of wing leading edge at the root to be 9.85 m from the nose of the
airplane.
The C.G of the airplane lies at 14.61 m from the nose.

6.4
6.4.1

C.G Travel for Critical Cases

Full Payload and No Fuel

For the case of full payload and no fuel,the fuel contribution to the weight
is not present.However, since we have assumed that the c.g of the fuel to
be at the quarter chord of the m.a.c of the wing(where the c.g of the entire
airplane has been positioned)there will be no c.g shift in this case.
Hence,the C.G shift is 0%.
6.4.2

No Payload and No Fuel

For this case,the fuel as well as the payload contribution are not present.Since
the c.g of payload is not at the c.g of the entire airplane,the c.g is bound to
shift by a certain amount in this case.The moment calculations were performed and the new c.g location was obtained as 14.93 m.Therefore the c.g
shift is 14.93 - 14.63 = 0.3 m.
Hence the c.g shift is +7.28% of m.a.c.

58

6.4.3

No Payload and Full fuel

For this case,since there is no payload, the c.g is bound to shift.On performing calculations,we obtain the new c.g location to be 14.84 m.Therefore the
c.g shift is 14.84 - 14.63 = 0.21 m.
Hence the c.g shift is +5.17% of the m.a.c.
6.4.4

Payload distribution for 15% c.g travel

According to Lebedenski[7], a total c.g shift of 15% is acceptable in general

for commercial airplanes.Hence,we go on to obtain the maximum payload
that can be concentrated in the front portion of the passenger cabin such
that a c.g shift of 7.5% is produced.
We assume the percentage of payload to be x and also assume the payload c.g to be at x% of the passenger cabin length.Performing the calculations
yields the value of x to be 90%.
Similarly,we also obtain the maximum payload that can be concentrated
at the rear half of the passenger cabin resulting in a c.g shift of 15%.
On performing calculations we obtain the value of x as 70%.
Hence,the c.g locations for various critical cases and payload distribution
for c.g shift of 15% have been calculated.

6.5

Summary

Wing location(leading edge of root of trapezoidal wing) - 9.85 m

c.g location with Full payload and full fuel - 14.61 m
c.g travel for No Payload and No Fuel - 7.28%
c.g travel for No Payload and full Fuel - 5.17%
For a c.g travel of 7.5% on either side of original c.g location,90% of
passengers can be concentrated in the front and 70% in the rear.

59

Control Surfaces

7.1

Stability and Controllability

The ability of a vehicle to maintain its equilibrium is termed stability and

the influence which the pilot or control system can exert on the equilibrium
is termed its controllability.The basic requirement for static longitudinal stability of any airplane is a negative slope of the curve of the pitching moment
coefficient, Cmcg , versus lift coefficient,CL . Dynamic stability requires that
the vehicle be not only statically stable,but also that the motions following
a disturbance from equilibrium be such as to restore the equilibrium.
Even though the vehicle might be statically stable, it is possible that the
oscillations following a disturbance might increase in magnitude with each
oscillation,thereby making it impossible to restore the equilibrium.

7.2
7.2.1

Static Longitudinal Stability and Control

Specifications

The horizontal tail must be large enough to insure that the static longitudinal stability criterion,dCmcg /dCL will be negative for all anticipated
center of gravity positions.
An elevator should be provided so that the pilot will be able to trim
the airplane(maintain Cm = 0) at all anticipated values of CL .
The tail should be large enough and and its elevator powerful enough
to enable the pilot rotate the airplane during the take-off run to the
required angle of attack.This condition is termed as the Nose wheel
Lift-off condition.
7.2.2

Aft Center of gravity limit

For the stick free case and for small angles of attack,the following expression for the aft center of gravity limit in terms of the tail-size parameter,V
we have the following equation. (Section 9.2 of [5])




 

at
d
Ch
dCm
(xc.g )af t
+ V t 1
1
+
d
Ch
dCl power
F us,N ac aw
(61)
The value of xc.g from above equation is termed the stick-free neutral
point,since it is the c.g location at which the static stability is neutral.
dCm
= xa.c
dCL

60

7.2.3

Forward center of Gravity Limit

The forward c.g. limit is not generally dependent on maintaining stability.

As the c.g is moved forward ,the stability contribution xc.g xa.c of the wing
becomes more and more negative ,thereby increasing the static stability.In
order to keep the airplane in equilibrium as the c.g is moved forward,the
elevator must be capable of trimming out the resulting negative pitching
moment.The pitching moment will be the greatest when the airplane is at
CLmax when the airplane is landing and ground effects decrease the downwash at the tail.
The equation of pitching moments may be solved for the position of the
most forward c.g by assuming the airplane trimmed(Cmcg = 0) at CLmax as
follows(Section 9.2 of [5])

(xcg )f orward

7.2.4



w G iw + it Cmac(f laps) + Cm(f us) + Cm(power)
Cm
emax +
+
= xac
CLmax

Cm
(62)

Determination of initial parameters

m
( dC
dC )F us
L

dCm
dCL


=
F us

Kf Wf2 Lf
Scaw

(63)

The value of Kf is obtained as 0.0119 from graph 1-9:1 of K.D.Wood[10].

aw =6.276 /radian = 0.1095 /degree
from the value obtained in section 4.5 on wing design.
Therefore,


dCm
dCL


=
f us

0.0119 3.592 33
= 0.1036
111.63 3.9 0.1095

The contribution of nacelle to (dCm /dCL ) is neglected.

d/d
d
114.6 aw
=
d
A
61

(64)

d
114.6 0.1095
=
= 0.4297
d
9.3


dCm
dCL


power

dCm
dCL


=
power

T tp
Wc

(65)

tp is the distance of thrust line from c.g(the distance is measured perpendicular to the thrust line).For the designed airplane we make an
estimate of tp to be 0.19 m.At the cruise altitude, we choose a (T /W )
of 0.06.
Therefore,


dCm
dCL


=
power,cruise

0.06 0.62
= 0.00292
13

(CL )max is taken as 2.5 from Section 3. (CL )max with no flaps is 1.4.
(CL )f laps = 1.1.
awg is the lift curve slope of the wing close to the ground. It is obtained by calculating the value of aw at lower velocities. A value of
V = 1.3 49 = 63.7m/s corresponds to a value of M = 0.19 and hence
gives a value of
(aw )landing = 4.57/radian = 0.0796.
The awg is obtained by adding the ground effect to the (aw )landing obtained.Hence
(awg )landing = 1.1(aw )landing = 5.027/radian = 0.0877/deg

(66)

W g
(CL )max
(67)
awg k
k is the ground effect factor obtained from Fig 1-9:4 of Wood[10].
(CL )max is the value without flaps and corresponds to 1.4. k was obtained as 1.1((for height of a.c above ground)/semi span of 0.1).
W g =

W g = 10.16
62

 at and atg
at is obtained as 0.0828/deg by using the tail parameters in eq.(55).
atg is the lift curve slope of the wing close to the ground. It is obtained by calculating the value of at at lower velocities. A value of
V = 1.3 49 = 63.7m/s corresponds to a value of M = 0.19 and hence
gives a value of
(at )landing = 3.91/radian = 0.0682/deg.
The atg is obtained by adding the ground effect to the (at )landing obtained.Hence
(atg )landing = 1.1(at )landing = 5.027/radian = 0.0877/deg

(68)

iw is taken as 1 from Section 4.

Cmjet at landing = 0
Cmac(f laps)
Cmac(f laps) = Cmac + Cmac(f )

Sf c f
Sc

(69)

Cmac for the airfoil is taken as 0.1 from airfoil database.Cmac is

taken as -0.4 from Perkins and Hage[11], Figure 5.40.
Cmac(f laps) = 0.1 0.4 0.56 1.1 = 0.3464
Cm(F us)


dCm
d


=
f us

dCm
dCL


CLalpha
f us

Hence using the value of CL with ground effect,

(Cm )f us = 0.1036 0.0877 = 0.0091
Cmf us = 0.0091 (w iw ) = 0.0091(10.16 1) = 0.0834

63

(70)

 Ch and Ch
The values of Ch and Ch are obtained from Fig 1-9:5 of Wood[10].
Since not much detail is available about the nature of elevators we
assume the standard design and obtain the following values.
Ch =-0.00660
Ch =-0.01140
Cm
Cm = at

St lt
t
S c

(71)

Cm = 0.08095 0.95 0.57 VH = 0.04438VH

emax
emax is chosen as 25 which is typical of most airplanes.
it For the preliminary design we assume it = 1 which is the typically
the value of passenger airplanes.
Now,that we have obtained the various parameters required for the longitudinal stability criterion we go on to calculate V which affects the horizontal
tail sizing. We adopt the following consideration to determine V . Cm is
approximately equal to -1.15 for transport airplane at M = 0.8(Raymer[4],
chapter 16). Assuming c.g at a.c


dCm
1.15
= 0.183
=
dCL
6.276
Hence
xcg(af t) xac
= 0.183

c
c
Substituting in eq.(61), we get
0.183 = 0.1036 0.2958V + 0.00292
V = 0.98
We obtain the horizontal tail area to be
64

0.98 3.9 111.63

= 28.71m2
14.86
Remark: Keeping in view the large number of approximations involved in
calculation of parameters during landing and take-off, the cross check for
forward c.g. location and nose wheel lift-off conditions are not carried out at
this stage.
Sht =

7.3
7.3.1

Lateral Stability and Control

Specifications

The directional stability criterion,dCn /dC should be negative for any

anticipated speed greater than 1.2 times the stalling speed.
The yawing moment control(rudder) must be powerful enough to (a)
counteract the yawing moment encountered in rolls(adverse yaw),
(b)in cross-wind landings or takeoffs, (c)in one engine off condition
and (d)in spin when the recovery is effected primarily by the rudder
control.
To regain and maintain straight flight with one engine inoperative at a
minimum speed not greater than 1.3 times the stalling speed.
7.3.2

Equations for directional stability

The equations for directional stability can be derived as

dCn
= Cn(wing) + Cn(F us) + Cn(power) + Cn(T ail)
d
7.3.3

(72)

Determination of initial parameters

In the preliminary analysis of directional static stability, the contributions of

wing, power and interference effects are ignored.
Cn(f us)
Cn(f us) =

kn Vn
28.7Sb

(73)

The value of kn was obtained from Figure 1:9-2 of Wood[10] as kn =0.95

Cn(f us) =

0.95 217.86
= 0.002005
28.7 111.63 32.22
65

 Cn(tail)
Cn(tail) = av

Sv lv
S b

(74)

av = 0.0378 per degree.

Cn(tail) = 0.0378 VV
The value of Cn(desirable) is given by Perkins and Hage[11] as follows
Cn(desirable)

 1/2
W
= 0.0005 2
b

(75)

Therefore ,for the present case we have,

Cn(desirable) = 0.001709
Hence,

Cn(desirable) = Cn(f us) + Cn(tail)

0.001709 = 0.002005 0.0378 VV

(76)
(77)

or VV = 0.098
This value is almost the same as what we obtained in our initial tail
sizing.
Therefore,vertical tail area is
Svt =

111.63 32.22 0.098

= 25.43m2
13.86

66

8
8.1

Features of the Designed Airplane

Three View Drawing

The 3-view drawing of the airplane designed is given in figure

8.2

Overall Dimensions

Length : 34.32
Wing Span : 32.22 m
Height above ground : 11.17
Wheel base : 13.2 m
Wheel track : 5.8 m

8.3

Engine details

Similar to CFM 56 - 2B
Seal Level Static Thrust : 97.9 kN
By pass ratio : 6.5 (For which the Engine characteristics are given in [8] )
SFC : at M = 0.8, h = 10972 m(36 000 f t), SF C is taken as 0.6 hr1

8.4

Weights

Gross Weight : 59175 kgf

Empty Weight : 29706 kgf
Fuel Weight : 12131 kgf
Payload : 17338 kgf
Maximum Landing Weight : 50296 kgf

67

68
Figure 8: Three view drawing of the airplane

8.5

Wing Geometry

Planform Shape : Cranked wing

Span : 32.22 m
Area : 111.63 m2
Airfoil : NASA - SC(2) series, t/c = 14%, Clopt = 0.5
Root Chord : 5.59 m (Equivalent Trapezoidal wing)
Tip Chord : 1.34 m (Equivalent Trapezoidal wing)
Root Chord of Cranked Wing : 7.44 m
Portion of wing with straight trailing edge : 11.28 m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 3.9 m
Quarter chord Sweep : 27.69o
Dihedral : 5o
Twist : 3o
Incidence : 1.4o
Taper Ratio : 0.24 (Equivalent Trapezoidal wing)
Aspect Ratio : 9.3

8.6

Fuselage Geometry

Length : 33 m
Maximum Diameter : 3.59 m

8.7

Nacelle Geometry

No. of nacelles : 2
Nacelle Diameter : 1.62 m
Cross sectional Area : 2.06 m2
Length of Nacelle : 3.3 m (based on B737 Nacelle)

8.8

Horizontal Tail Geometry

Span : 11.98 m
Area : 28.71 m2
Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 2.67 m
Quarter Chord Sweep : 32o
Root Chord : 3.80 m
Tip chord : 0.99 m
69

Taper Ratio : 0.26

Aspect Ratio : 5

8.9

Vertical Tail Geometry

Span : 6.58 m
Area : 25.43 m2
Root Chord : 5.90 m
Tip chord : 1.83 m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 4.22 m
Quarter Chord Sweep : 37o
Taper Ratio : 0.31
Aspect Ratio : 1.70

8.10

Other details

CLmax without flap : 1.4

CLmax with landing flaps : 2.7
Maximum Load Factor nmax : 3.5
CLmax with T.O flaps : 2.16

8.11

Crew and Payload

Flight crew : 2(pilot and co-pilot)

Cabin crew : 5
Passenger seating : 138 economy and 12 business class

8.12

Performance

The detailed performance estimation is given in section 9. The highlights are

as follows.
The performance is worked for a gross weight of 59175 kgf and wing
loading of 5195 N m2 except for landing where the landing weight is
taken as 85% of take-off weight.
Maximum Mach No. at 36000 ft with cruise thrust = 0.859, with climb
thrust = 0.874.

70

 Maximum still air range at M = 0.81 and h = 36000 f t is 5602 km.

Maximum rate of climb at sea level with climb thrust = 1087 m/min
Service ceiling = 11.55 km, Absolute ceiling = 11.88 km
Take-off distance over 50 ft = 860 m(2820 f t) and balanced field length
= 1830 m(6000 f t)
Landing distance from 15 m = 1140 m(3740 f t)
Remark : The designed airplane meets the requirements set out in the
specifications. The seating arrangement takes care of the passenger comfort
and the choice of engine reflects low level of noise.

71

Performance Estimation

The details regarding overall dimensions, engine details, weights, geometric

parameters of wing, fuselage, nacelle, horizontal tail, vertical tail, vertical tail
and other details like CLmax in various conditions and maximum load factor
are given in section 8.2 - 8.10. The details of flight condition for estimation
of drag polar are as follows
Altitude : 10972 m = 36000 ft
Mach number : 0.8
Kinematic Viscosity : 3.90536 105 m2 /s
Density : 0.3639 kg/m3
Speed of Sound : 295.07 m/s
Flight Speed : 236.056 m/s
Weight of the Airplane : 59175 kgf

9.1

Estimation of Drag Polar

The drag polar is assumed to be of the form

CD = CDo +

CL2
Ae

The quantity CDO is assumed to be given by

CDO = (CDO )W B + (CDO )V + (CDO )H + (CDO )M isc

(78)

where suffices W B, V, H, M isc denote wing-body combination, vertical tail,

horizontal tail, and miscellaneous contributions respectively.
9.1.1

Estimation of (CDo )W B

Initially, the drag polar is obtained at a Mach number of 0.6 as suggested by

[6]. (CDo )W B is then given as :
(CDo )W B = (CDo )W + (CDo )B

SB
Sref

The suffix B denotes fuselage and SB is the maximum frontal area of fuselage.
(CDO )W is given as :

  

t
Swet
(CDo )W = Cfw 1 + L
c
Sref wing
72

Here, the Reynolds number used to determine the turbulent flat plate
skin friction coefficient is based on the mean aerodynamic chord ce of the
exposed wing. (Swet )e is the wetted area of the exposed wing.
Now cr = 5.59m, ct = 1.34m, b/2 = 16.11m and df us = 3.59m. Hence
cre = 5.59

5.59 1.34 3.59

= 5.116m
16.11
2

1.34
= 0.262
5.116



2
1 + 0.262 + 0.2622
=
5.116
= 3.596m
3
1 + 0.262
= 16.11 1.795 = 14.315m

e =
ce
(b/2)e

M = 0.6, a = 295.07m/s V = 177.12m/s. Also = 3.90536 105 .

Hence,
177.12 3.596
= 16.31 106
3.90536 105
k = 1.015 105 m corresponds to standard camouflage paint, average
application (from [4]). Hence
Re =

3.596
l
=
= 3.543 105
k
1.015 105
The Recutof f corresponding to the above l/k is 30 106 . The Cfw is then
measured from the graph in [6] as
Cfw = 0.00265
(t/c)avg = 14% and (t/c)max at x/c > 0.3 L = 1.2.

5.116 + 1.341
= 14.314
2 = 92.41m2
2
= 2 92.41(1 + 1.2 0.14) = 215.8m2


Sexposedplanf orm
Swetw
Hence,

(CDf )w = 0.00265 (1 + 1.2 0.14)

215.8
= 0.00598
111.63

(CDo )B is given as:

(CDO )B = (CDf )B + (CDp )B + CDb


  
Sbase
60
lb
Swet
(CDO )B = CfB 1 +
+ CDb
3 + 0.0025
d
SB f us
Sref
(lb /d)
73

lf = 33.0m and dmax = 3.59m

Reb =

177.12 33
= 149.6 106
3.905 105

k = 1.015 105 m corresponds to standard camouflage paint, average

application. Hence
33
l
=
= 32.51 105
5
k
1.015 10
The Recutof f corresponding to the above l/k is 2.6 108 . The Cfw is then
measured from the graph in [6] as
Cfw = 0.0019

(Swet )f us = 0.75 3.59 33 = 279m2

3.592 = 10.12m2
SB =
4
Hence.
(CDf )B = 0.0019

279
= 0.0524
10.12


60
279
(CDp )B = 0.0019
+ 0.0025 (33/3.59)
= 0.00524
3
(33/3.59)
10.12
CDb is assumed to be zero, since base area is almost zero. Hence
(CDO )B = 0.0524 + 0.00524 + 0 = 0.0576
(CD )canopy is taken as 0.002. Hence (CDO )B = 0.0596
Finally we have:
(CDo )W B = 0.00598 + 0.0596
9.1.2

10.12
= 0.01138
111.63

Estimation of (CDo )V and (CDo )H

The estimation of (CDo )H and (CDo )V can be done in a manner similar to that
for the wing. However the details regarding the exposed tail area etc. would
be needed. In the absence of the detailed data on the shape of fuselage at
rear etc., a simplified approach given in [6] is adopted, wherein CDf = 0.0025
for both horizontal and vertical tails.
74

SW = 2(Sh + Sv )
Hence,
(CDo )hv = 0.0025(28.71 + 25.43)
9.1.3

1
= 0.0024
111.63

(79)

Estimation of Misc Drag - Nacelle

For calculating drag due to the nacelles we use the short cut method for
which we have:
Swet
(CDo )nacelle = 0.006
Sref
where, Swet is the wetted area of nacelle. Here Swet = 16.79m2 . Since we
have two nacelles the total drag will be twice of this. Finally we get:
(CDo )nacelle = 0.006
9.1.4

16.79
2 = 0.0018
111.63

CDo of the airplane

Taking 2% for the interference drag (from [6]), we get the CDo of the airplane
as
CDo = 1.02 [0.01138 + 0.0024 + 0.0018] = 0.0159
(80)
9.1.5

Induced Drag

The induced drag component has the Oswalds efficiency factor e which is
estimated by adding the effect of all the aircraft components on induced drag.
The rough estimate of e can be obtained from:
1
1
1
1
=
+
+
e
ewing ef uselage eother
From [9]
ewing = (ew )=0 cos( 5)
where is the wing sweep. (ewing )=0 = 0.97 for AR = 9.3, = 0.24
from [12].
1/e us
Hence ewing = 0.97 cos (27.69 5) = 0.8948. Also (Sf f/S)
= 0.8 for a round
fuselage. Hence
1
ef us

= 0.8

10.122
= 0.0725
111.63
75

1
eother

= 0.05

Finally we have:
e=
Hence
K=
9.1.6

0.89481

1
= 0.8064
+ 0.0725 + 0.05

1
1
=
= 0.04244
Ae
9.3 0.8064

Final Drag Polar

CD = 0.0159 + 0.04244 CL2

Figure 9: Subsonic Drag Polar

76

(81)

Remark
The polar given by 81 is valid at subcritical Mach numbers. The increase in CDo and K at higher Mach numbers is discussed in section
4.2.
The maximum lift to drag ratio ((L/D)max ) is given by
1
(L/D)max = p
2 CDo K
Using equation 81, (L/D)max is 19.25, which is typical of modern jet
transport airplanes.
It may be noted that the parabolic polar is an approximation and is not
valid beyond CLmax . It is not accurate close to CL = 0 and CL = CLmax

9.2

Engine Characteristics

To calculate the performance, the variations of thrust and SFC with speed
and altitude are needed. Chapter 9 of [8] contains these variations for turbofan engines with various bypass ratios. The Thrust variations versus Mach
number with altitude as parameters are given in non-dimensional form for
take-off, cruise and climb ratings. The values were read from the curves and
later smoothed. The values multiplied by 97.9 kN, the sea level static thrust
rating for the chosen engine, are shown in Figures 10 and 11. Figure 10
also contains (a) the variation of thrust with Mach number at sea level with
take-off rating. (b) variations of climb thrust with Mach number at
h = 38000 and 39000 ft; these are obtained by interpolating values at 36000
and 40000 ft and are used for computation of performance at these altitudes.
The SFC variation is also given in [8], but is taken as 0.6hr1 under cruise
conditions based on the value recommended by [4].

77

78

Figure 10: Take Off for sea level and Climb Thrust per engine for various altitudes

79
Figure 11: Cruise Thrust per engine for various altitudes

9.3

Level Flight Performance

In steady Level flight, the equations of motion, in standard notation are

T D = 0
LW = 0

1 2
1
V SCL = W = V 2 SCL
2
2
1 2
D =
V SCD = T
2
L =

9.3.1

(82)
(83)

(84)
(85)

Stalling speed

In level flight,
s
V =

2W
SCL


(86)

Since CL cannot exceed CLmax , there is a flight speed below which level
flight is not possible. The flight speed at CL = CLmax is called the stalling
speed and is denoted by Vs
s

2W
Vs =
(87)
SCLmax
Since decreases with altitude, Vs increases with height. We note that
W/S = 5195N/m2 , CLmax = 2.7 with landing flaps and CLmax = 1.4 without
flaps. The values of stalling speed at different altitudes and flap settings are
tabulated in Table 6 and shown in Figure 12.

80

Vs (CLmax = 1.4) Vs (CLmax = 2.7)

3
(m) (kg/m )
(m/s)
(m/s)
0
1.225
77.83
56.04
2000
1.006
85.86
61.83
4000
0.819
95.18
68.54
6000
0.659
106.06
76.37
8000
0.525
118.87
85.59
10000
0.412
134.09
96.56
11000
0.363
142.80
102.83
12000
0.310
154.52
111.27
Table 6: Variation of stalling speed with altitude

Figure 12: Stalling speed Vs Altitude

81

9.3.2

Variation of Vmin and Vmax with Altitude

To determine the Vmin and Vmax at each altitude, the following procedure is
adopted.
The engine thrust as a function of velocity at each altitude is obtained
from the smoothed data.
The drag at each altitude is found as a function of velocity using the
drag polar and the level flight formulae given below.

2 (W/S)
V 2
CD = CDo + KCL2
1 2
Drag =
V SCD
2
Tavail = f (M )
CL =

(88)
(89)
(90)
(91)

Where CDo = 0.0159 and K = 0.04244.

However, the cruise Mach number (Mcruise ) for this airplane is 0.8.
Hence CDo and K are expected to become functions of Mach number
above Mcruise . To get some guidelines about variations of CDo and K,
we consider the drag polars of B-727 given in Volume 6, Chapter 5 of
[13]. These drag polars are shown in the Figure 13 as discrete points.

82

Figure 13: Drag polars at different Mach numbers for B727-100; Symbols are
data from [13] and Solid lines are the parabolic fits

These polars were approximated by the parabolic polar expression

namely CD = CDo + K CL2 . The values of CDo and K for the various
Mach numbers are given in the Table 7. The parabolic fit is also shown
in Figure 13.
M
0.7
0.76
0.82
0.84
0.86
0.88

CDo
0.01631
0.01634
0.01668
0.01695
0.01733
0.01792

K
0.04969
0.05257
0.06101
0.06807
0.08183
0.103

Table 7: Variation of CDo and K with Mach number (Parabolic fit)

The variations in CDo and K with Mach number are plotted in the
Figures 14 and 15. It is seen that there is no significant increase in
83

Figure 14: Variation of CDo with Mach number

CDo and K upto M = 0.76. This is expected to be the cruise Mach

number for the airplane (B727-100). Following analytical expressions
have been found to closely represent the changes in CDo and K from
M = 0.76 to M = 0.86.

CDo = 0.01634 0.001 (M 0.76) + 0.11 (M 0.76)2 (92)

K = 0.05257 + (M 0.76)2 + 20.0 (M 0.76)3
(93)
In the case of the present airplane, the cruise Mach number is 0.8. The
variations of CDo and K above Mcruise and upto M = 0.9, based on
B727-100 data is taken as follows.

CDo = 0.0159 0.001 (M 0.8) + 0.11 (M 0.8)2

K = 0.0455 + (M 0.8)2 + 20.0 (M 0.8)3

84

(94)
(95)

Figure 15: Variation of K with Mach number

The thrust available and thrust required curves are plotted at each
altitude as a function of velocity. The points of intersection give the
Vmin and Vmax at each altitude. To arrive at Vmin , the stalling speed
also needs to be taken in to account. Hence in the Figures. 16 to 21,
the portion of the Vmin curve below Vs is shown as dotted lines, as the
drag polar is not valid there. Vs is taken for CLmax without flaps.
The calculations are carried out for h = 0, 10000, 15000, 25000, 30000
and 36000 ft, i.e S.L, 3048, 4572, 7620, 9144 and 10972.8 m using Tavail
as climb thrust and cruise thrust. Results are presented only for climb
thrust case.

85

h
h
(in ft) (in m)
S.L
0
10000 3048
15000 4572
25000 7620
30000 9144
36000 10972
38000 11582
38995 11884

Vs
77.833
90.579
98.131
116.292
127.278
142.594
149.557
153.159

Vmin (m/s) Vmin (m/s) Vmax (m/s) Vmax (m/s)

Tcr
Tclimb
Tcr
Tclimb
< Vs
< Vs
258.711
269.370
< Vs
< Vs
272.060
280.595
< Vs
< Vs
275.613
283.300
< Vs
< Vs
272.929
279.291
< Vs
< Vs
267.854
271.755
176.054
169.071
253.671
258.154
217.386
200.896
243.676
248.630
235.471
229.865
235.483
238.649

Table 8: Variation of Vmin and Vmax

Figure 16: Available and Required Thrust at S.L

86

Figure 17: Available and Required Thrust at h = 3048.0m

Figure 18: Available and Required Thrust at h = 4572.0m

87

Figure 19: Available and Required Thrust at h = 7620.0m

Figure 20: Available and Required Thrust at h = 9144.0m

88

Figure 21: Available and Required Thrust at h = 10972.8m

Figure 22: Variation of Vmin and Vmax with altitude

89

9.4

Steady Climb

In this flight, the C.G of the airplane moves along a straight line inclined to
the horizontal at an angle . The velocity of flight is assumed to be constant
during the climb. Since the flight is steady, acceleration is zero and the
equations of motion can be written as:
T D W sin = 0
L W cos = 0

(96)
(97)

To calculate the variation of rate of climb with flight velocity at different

altitudes, we adopt the following procedure.
Choose an altitude.
Choose a flight speed.
Noting that CL = 2W cos /SV 2 , we get

CD = CDo + K

2W cos
SV 2

Also
Vc = V sin
r
V2
cos =
1 c2
V
Using the above equations,


A
A=

kW 2
;
1
V 2 S
2

Vc
V

2


+B

Vc
V


+C = 0

(98)

1
2kW 2
C = Tavail V 2 SCDo
(99)
2
V 2 S

B = W ;

Since altitude and flight velocity have been chosen, the thrust available
is read from the climb thrust curves in 10. Further the variation of CDo
and K with Mach number is taken as in Equations 94 and 95.

90

 Equation 98 gives 2 values of Vc /V . We choose the value which is less

that 1.0 as sin cannot be greater than unity. Hence

= sin1 (Vc /V )
Vc = V sin

(100)
(101)

This procedure is repeated for various speeds between Vmin and Vmax .
The entire procedure is then repeated for various altitudes.
The variations of (R/C) and with velocity and with altitude as parameters are shown in Figure 23 and 25. The variations of (R/C)max
and max with altitude are shown in Figure 24 and 26. The variations
of V(R/C)max and Vmax with altitude are shown in Figure 27 and 28. A
summary of results is presented in table 9.
h
h
(R/C)max V(R/C)max
(in ft) (in m) (in m/min) (in m/s)
0
0.0
1086.63
149.7
10000 3048.0
867.34
167.5
15000 4572.0
738.16
174.0
25000 7620.0
487.41
198.2
30000 9144.0
313.43
212.2
36000 10972.8
115.57
236.1
38000 11582.4
41.58
236.9
38995 11885.7
1.88
235.8

max
(in degrees)
8.7
6.0
4.7
2.6
1.5
0.5
0.2
0.0

Table 9: Climb Performance

91

Vmax
(in m/s)
88.5
111.6
125.7
164.1
188.0
230.2
234.0
235.8

Figure 23: Rate of Climb Vs Velocity for various altitudes

Figure 24: Maximum Rate of Climb Vs Altitude

92

Figure 25: Angle of Climb Vs Velocity for various altitudes

Figure 26: Maximum angle of Climb Vs Altitude

93

Figure 27: Velocity at Maximum Rate of Climb Vs Altitude

Figure 28: Velocity at Maximum angle of Climb Vs Altitude

94

Remarks
1. The discontinuties in slope in Figures 27 and 28 at high velocities are
due to the change in drag polar as the Mach number exceeds 0.8.
2. From Figure 24, the absolute cieling (at which (R/C)max is zero) is
11.88 km. The service cieling at which (R/C)max = 50m/min is 11.55
km

95

9.5

Range and Endurance

In this section, the range of the aircraft in a constant altitude and constant
velocity cruise is studied. Range is given by the formula
s
s
"
#
2W
K
K
3.6V
2W
1
2
p
tan1
R=
tan1
(102)
2S
2S
V
C
V
Cdo
T SF C KCdo
do
where W1 is the weight of the aircraft at the start of the cruise and W2
is the weight of the aircraft at the end of the cruise.
The cruising altitude taken is h = 10972m. TSFC is taken to be constant as 0.6hr1 . The variation of drag polar above M = 0.8 is given by
Equation.94 and 95.
W1 = Wo = 59175 9.81N
Wf = 0.205 W1
Allowing 6% fuel as trapped fuel, W2 becomes
W2 = W1 0.94 Wf
The values of endurance (in hours) are obtained by dividing the expression for range by 3.6V where V is in m/s. The values of Range(R) and
Endurance(E) in flight at different velocities are presented in Table 10 and
are plotted in Figures 29 and 30.

96

Figure 29: Constant Velocity Range at h = 10972 m

Figure 30: Endurance at h = 10972 m

Remarks
1. It is observed that the maximum range of 5600 km is obtained at a
velocity of 239m/s (860 kmph). Corresponding Mach number is 0.81
97

M
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.81
0.82
0.83
0.84
0.85
0.86
0.87
0.88

V
(in m/s)
147.531
162.285
177.038
191.791
206.544
221.297
236.050
239.001
241.952
244.902
247.853
250.803
253.754
256.705
259.655

CL

CD

L/D

1.312
1.085
0.911
0.777
0.670
0.583
0.513
0.500
0.488
0.476
0.465
0.454
0.444
0.433
0.424

0.089
0.066
0.051
0.041
0.035
0.030
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.030
0.032
0.036
0.040

14.75
16.48
17.82
18.72
19.17
19.23
18.95
18.78
18.36
17.65
16.62
15.29
13.76
12.13
10.52

R
E
(in km) (in hours)
2979.0
5.61
3608.0
6.18
4189.6
6.57
4691.7
6.80
5095.6
6.85
5396.5
6.77
5599.8
6.59
5602.3
6.51
5527.0
6.35
5352.2
6.07
5070.1
5.68
4691.2
5.20
4242.3
4.64
3758.8
4.07
3275.3
3.50

Table 10: Range and Endurance in Constant Velocity flight at h = 10972m

(36000f t)
which is slightly higher than the Mach number beyond which CDo and
K increase. This can be explained based on two factors namely (i)
the range increases as the flight speed increases (ii) after Mcruise is
exceeded, CDo and K increase thus reducing (L/D)max .
2. The range calculated above is the gross still air range. The safe range
would be about two-thirds of this. In the present case, the safe range
would be 3733km.
3. The maximum endurance of 6.85 hours occurs in a flight at V =
206m/s. (742 kmph). It can noted that the endurance is roughly
constant over a speed range of 190 m/s to 230 m/s.

98

9.6

Turning Performance

In this section, the performance of the airplane in a steady, co-ordinated,

level turn is studied. The equations of motion in this case are:
T D = 0
W L cos = 0
W
L sin =
g
where is the angle of bank.
These equations give:
V2
r =
g tan
V
g tan
=
=
r
V
L
1
Load Factor n =
=
W
cos
where n = L/W , is the rate of turn and r is the radius of turn.
The following procedure is used to obtain rmin and max
1. A flight speed and altitude are chosen and the level flight lift coefficient
CLL is obtained as :
CLL =

2(W/S)
V 2

2. If CLmax /CLL < nmax , where nmax is the maximum load factor for
which the aircraft is designed, then the turn is limited by CLmax and
CLT1 = CLmax . However if CLmax /CLL > nmax , then the turn is limited
by nmax , and CLT1 = nmax CLL .
3. From the drag polar, CDT1 is obtained corresponding to CLT1 . Then
1
DT 1 = V 2 SCDT1
2
If DT 1 > Ta , where Ta is the available thrust at that speed and altitude, then the turn is limited by the engine output. In this case, the
maximum permissible value of CD in turning flight is found from
CDT =
99

Ta
1
V 2 S
2

From the above relation, the value of CLT is calculated as

r
CDT CDo
CLT =
K
However if DT 1 < Ta , then the turn is not limited by the engine output
and the value of CLT calculated in step (ii) is retained.
4. Once CLT is known, the load factor during the turn is determined as
n=

CLT
CLL

Once n is known, the values of , r and can be calulated using the

equations given above.
The above steps are then repeated for various speeds and altitudes. A
typical turning flight performance estimation is presented in Table 11. In
these calculations, CLmax = 1.4 and nmax = 3.5 are assumed. The variation
of turning flight performance with altitude is shown in Table. 12. Figures
31, 32, 33, 34 respectively present (a) radius of turn with velocity and with
altitude as parameter, (b) minimum radius of turn with altitude, (c) rate of
turn with velocity and with altitude as parameter and (d) maximum rate of
turn with altitude.
v
78.83
98.83
118.83
138.83
158.83
178.83
198.83
218.83
238.83
241.83

n
1.026
1.612
2.331
2.813
2.993
3.089
3.080
2.930
2.573
2.494

Clt
(in degrees)
1.4000
12.892
1.4000
51.670
1.4000
64.596
1.2376
69.173
1.0062
70.482
0.8192
71.112
0.6607
71.053
0.5189
70.045
0.3826
67.132
0.3617
66.363

r (in m)
2767.70
787.21
683.63
747.41
911.60
1115.38
1383.50
1772.43
2452.36
2609.20

0.0285
0.1255
0.1738
0.1858
0.1742
0.1603
0.1437
0.1235
0.0974
0.0927

Table 11: A typical turning flight performance at Sea level

100

Figure 31: Radius of Turn Vs Velocity at various altitudes

Figure 32: Velocity at Rmin Vs Altitude

101

Figure 33: Vs Speed at various altitudes

Figure 34: Velocity at max Vs Altitude

102

h
rmin
Vrmin
(in m) (in m) (in m/s)
0.0
666
126.8
3048.0
945
132.6
4572.0
1155
135.1
7620.0
1971
138.3
9144.0
3247
151.3
10972.8 8582
211.0

max
0.1910
0.1410
0.1170
0.0731
0.0513
0.0256

V max
(in m/s)
127.8
133.6
136.1
165.3
187.3
231.0

Table 12: Turning flight performance

Remarks
1. The maximum value of is 0.191 and occurs at a speed of 127.8m/s
at sea level.
2. The minimum radius of turn is 666 m and occurs at a speed of 126.8m/s
at sea level.
3. The various graphs show a discontinuity in slope when the criterion
which limits the turn changes from nmax to thrust available.

9.7

Take-off distance

In this section, the take off performance of the airplane is evaluated. The
take-off distance consists of take-off run, transition and climb to screen
height. Rough estimates of the distance covered in these phases can be
obtained by writing down the appropriate equations of motion. However the
estimates are approximate and [4] recommends the following formulae for
take-off distance and balance field length based on the take-off parameter.
This parameter is defined as:
Take Off Parameter =

W/S
CLT O (T /W )

(103)

where W/S is wing loading in lb/f t2 , CLT O is 0.8 CLland = 0.8 2.7 =
2.16 and is the density ratio at take-off altitude.
In the present case:
W
= 5195N/m2 = 108.2lb/f t2 ;
S

CLT O = 0.82.7 = 2.16;

103

= 1.0(sea level)

and

T
2 97.9kN
=
= 0.3373
W
59175 9.81

Hence
108.2
= 148.86
(104)
1.0 2.16 0.3373
From [4], the take off distance, over 50, is 28230 or 861m. The balance
field length for the present case of two engined airplane is 60000 or 1829m.
Take Off Parameter =

Remark
It may be noted that the balance field length is more than twice the take off
distance itself.

9.8

Landing distance

In this section the landing distance of the airplane is calculated. From [4]
the landing distance for commericial airliners is given by the formula
 
1
W
+ 1000f t
(105)
Sland = 80
S CLmax
where W/S is in lbs/f t2 . In the present case:
(W/S)land = 0.85 (W/S)takeof f = 0.85 108.5 = 92.225lb/f t2
CLmax = 2.7
= 1.0
Hence
Sland = 80 92.225

1
+ 1000 = 3732f t = 1138m
1.0 2.7

104

(106)

9.9

Concluding remarks

1. Performance of a typical commercial airliner has been estimated for

stalling speed, maximum speed, minimum speed, steady climb, range,
endurance, turning, take-off and landing.
2. The performance approximately corresponds to that of B737-200.
3. Figure 35 presents the variation with altitude of the characteristic velocities corresponding to
stalling speed, Vs
maximum speed, Vmax
minimum speed as dictated by thrust, Vminthrust
maximum rate of climb, V(R/C)max
maximum angle of climb, Vmax
maximum rate of turn, V max
minimum radius of turn, Vrmin

105

106
Figure 35: Flight Envelope

10

Acknowledgements

The first author(EGT) thanks AICTE for the fellowship which enabled him
to carry out the work at IIT Madras.

References
[1] http://www.cfm56.com/engines/cfm56-5c/tech.html
[2] http://www.lissys.demon.co.uk/samp1/
[3] NASA Technical Paper 2969, Charles Harris (Mar 1990)
[4] Raymer.D.P. Aircraft design a conceptual approach. AIAA educational
series, 2006
[5] Tulapurkara.E.G Lecture Notes on Aircraft Design, Department of
Aerospace Engineering I.I.T Madras, 2007
[6] Roskam J. Methods of estimating drag polars of subsonic airplanesRoskam Aviation & Engineering Corporation, Ottawa, Kansas,
1983
[7] Lebedenski.A.A Aircraft design parametric studies Published by I.I.Sc,
Bangalore, 1971
[8] Jenkinson L.R., Simpkin P. and Rhodes D. Civil Jet Aircraft Design,
Arnold, 1999
[9] Hoerner S.F. Fluid dynamic drag, published by Hoerner Fluid Dynamics,
Brick Town, NJ, 1965
[10] Wood K.D. Aerospace vehicle design, Volume 1, Johnson publishing
company, Boulder, Colorado, 1966
[11] Perkins C.D. & Hage A.E. Airplane performance syability & control,
McGraw Hill, 1963
[12] Abbot I.H. and Doenhoff A.E. Theory of wing sections, Dover publications, 1959
[13] Roskam J. Aircraft design, Roskam Aviation & Engineering Corporation, Ottawa, Kansas, 1990

107